Brackley didn’t spend much time talking about El Salvador, but launched a soft-spoken but searing critique of higher education, and in the gentlest of ways, tried to get the attention of those who design university curriculum: "…I don’t mean injustice should be the exclusive focus of study, but failing to put it and its solutions at the center of our search for truth means relegating them to the periphery [and] conducting a partial search for truth, omitting large chunks of what we need to learn. And partial also in the sense that the university’s search would be driven by interests other than the authentic formation of our people and their desire to know."
"How can we responsibly graduate students who don’t know how many are poor and hungry in the world – and why? who don’t understand what the IMF…and World Bank do and don’t do?" A university that does that, the priest suggested, "accepts the division of the world into important people and unimportant people."
Putting the problems in context, Brackley offered good news and bad news scenarios: THE BAD NEWS: "…growing gap between rich and poor, ecological destruction; families, communities and egos crumbling – and a growing recognition that it is pointless to look at governments and political parties to solve the problems of poverty and violence." THE GOOD NEWS: "…change is coming from the bottom up; those with hope look to civil society, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), human rights groups, Amnesty International, Greenpeace, churches – or rather some churches, or parts of churches."